Okay, I just got back from test driving a dealer s10 extreme with my friend who is getting one in june. The guy forgot to give us a gas ticket and it was next to empty so we took the car ou and noticed the low gas so we put $5 of 93 in her to just over half tank. We got back and told him that we had to put gas in it but he got almost upset. He was talking about BP gas being bad for the chevy injectors. NEVER put BP gas in any chevy blah blah. Something about the aditives. We asked him what he wanted us to do and he said put in the cheapest 93 just not BP. I totally thought he was BSing us because we took it out for a 50 min drive. Only put on 30 miles on it, the guy was really load. Is this BS or what? If it is I'm calling that guy and telling him some facts. By the way, BP is British Petrol co.

------------------
, Jon (91 RS too many mods to list), getting new engine in summer

 

bump, please tell me this is pure BS

------------------
, Jon (91 RS too many mods to list), getting new engine in summer

 

if it were me i'd told him to put the crack pipe down and slowly back away.

------------------
ICON Motorsports

1st & 3rd

 

Amen Brother ede. Where does he get this idea from. BP gas is good quality just like your other major brands: Read - Exxon, Texaco, etc. Go back there some time later and get another test drive, but don't stay gone long. Tell him you filled up with Amoco and see if the dumbass freaks out. Amoco and BP are the same blend.
bsa

 

Its true. BP gas will eat GM injectors. It even says so in some of the newer GM car manuals. My neighbor down the street is a GM mechanic and He tells me truthfully that 4 out of 5 bad injector problems that he sees says they use BP gas.

 

I just did a little more research on the web and the reason GM doesnt like BP is because of its high sulfer contents, which contribute to burning out the injectors. As of right now BP is in the process of using Amoco's technology of producing low sulfer fuels which GM will approve of.

 

I've never heard of this. Can you post up some links to research about BPs crap gas?
I've done a little research and the sulfer amount by law has to be less than .10% of total mass. Now they say that the typical amount in the US is .03%. That was back in 1993 though. I'm not sure about now.
"Sulfur in the fuel creates corrosion, and when combusted will form corrosive gases that attack the engine, exhaust and environment. Sulfur also adversely affects the alkyl lead octane response and may poison exhaust catalysts."


------------------
, Jon (91 RS too many mods to list), getting new engine in summer

[This message has been edited by JPrevost (edited February 10, 2001).]

 

not that this means any more or less than what mkos had to say ,but friday i was at the local chevy dealer. i know the parts dept. people pretty well and ask them about this and they had never heard of it. another point is it's not very logical for BP to produce a product the GM says not to run and if i can't run BP fuel in my chevy i doubt if i'd be stopping there to fill up my dodge and going else where to fill up the chevy. there is anything unique about the parts used in GM fuel systems that ford, chrysler or all the imports have also.

------------------
ICON Motorsports

1st & 3rd

 

For any rational discussion to be conducted on this topic, the following assumptions would have to be accepted as fact. If either one is not accepted, the discussion is meaningless.

1. BP's gas is significantly different than other major oil companies
2. GM Fuel Injection systems are significantly different than other car company's injection systems

So for the purpose of the discussion let us assume that 1 *and* 2 are true. Let's qualify what we mean when we say 'BP gas is bad for GM injection systems': that by using BP gas in a GMFI car, we shorten the service life, the performance, or both, of the fuel injection system. We will leave for another discussion the qualitative merits of BP gas and GMFI relative to competing products, not being concerned with whether Exxon or any other oil company's gas is 'better' or 'worse' than BP, or whether GM makes better fuel injections systems than Ford or any other car maker.

Now, let's see where this takes us.

BP and GM are two of the largest corporations in the world. A fundamental premise of their existence is the profit motive. They have a vested interest in the compatibility of their products. Wouldn't it be reasonable to expect BP engineers to hold as a strategic design goal that their product work well in as many different vehicles as possible, and that considerable weight would be given to the kind of cars GM was building, given the number of vehicles they produce? Similarly at GM, wouldn't it be reasonable to expect they design their vehicles to work with one of the biggest producers of gasoline in the world? There is no 'tail wagging the dog' here. These are two of the biggest dogs on the planet, and what's good for one is generally good for the other.

The discussion could go in a variety directions, but I won't go any further here. I was going downtown to fill up my IROC with BP 93 this afternoon. I haven't changed my mind. Mkos, I'd be interested in the links to the sites you referred to.

 

To further add fuel to the debate, sulphur has always been a problem for refineries. The EPA would LOVE to make sulphur another factor in auto emissions, but because there is little that the auto manufacturers can do about it (its strictly a function of the crude oil used and the refineries process); the EPA has backed down on making this an emissions requirement.

I think the problem may be that with the high cost of crude, some of the refineries may be trying to save a buck and use the less desireable "high sulphur content" crude oil. So there very well may be some "truth" to Mkos' statement; who knows where BP gets its crude oil from?

 

...and to further complicate the matter, if BP is like most other gasoline retailers, their regional stations get fuel from regional refirneries or tank farms. Oddly, so do all the other fuel stations in a given area. There is an Amoco refinery, a Marathon refinery, and was a Clark refinery in this area. Most Amoco (Standard Oil) stations got their fuel from the Amoco refinery, but not all of them. The same was true for Clark and Marathon.

Even more strange, there were many other name brand stations in the area, like Phillips, Shell, etc., whose closest refineries were in Texas. Their fuel tankers came from the same tank farm that served all the rest. In light of this, calling one brand better or worse than another is probably about as valid as calling all Florida voters morons, when we know in fact only 51% of them are...

------------------
Later,
Vader
------------------
"No matter how hard you try you can't stop us now..."
Adobe Acrobat Reader 4.0

 

I believe mkos1980 is right. I am also a GM mechanic and in the computer database it says that certain fuel additives are incompatable with GM motec(multec?) injectors and will destroy them. I also think it's wierd. Maybe that's why my car ran like s**t after I added some cleaner. It goes on to say something about the additives eating though the insulation and ruining the coil pack. Also says GM m-injectors do not need cleaning(I don't believe that). Something to do with design. All I can say is, that fuel might be so strong that your car will run good until the injectors get screwed. If in doubt, keep it out. Hope this helps.

 

Whoa on the ‘Florida voters are morons’, Vader. Which 51% are you talking about? ; ) I’ll say this about that: some knew how to vote, some didn’t; the counters took the rap.

Back to the subject, I would suggest that BP gas is the same, in essence, wherever you go, at least in this country. We can talk about the about variables such as the quality of the crude oil, the technology available at various refineries, and others. My suggestion is valid if we assume BP uses uniform minimum qualitative and quantitative standards for their gas throughout the country. Back to the premise of the profit motive. Do you believe Exxon (or Mobil, Standard, etc.) would cut their profit margin to make their gas with fewer sulfurs (or any other undesirable component) if the government didn’t require it? I don’t. Vader’s post suggests there is no difference between the gasoline produced by different oil companies. If in some parts of the country the oil companies do not share tank farms, I would still agree with this contention, because the questions we are raising about BP are valid for all the gas producing oil companies. They all base decisions on their perception of economic reality.

 

now that we've heard argumants from both sides, considered all the issues and settled the question to our fullest mutual satisfaction i'm locking this thread. if anyone feels the need to continue please repost it and we'll see where that goes

------------------
ICON Motorsports

1st & 3rd